首页> 外文期刊>Traffic Injury Prevention >BioRID Dummy Responses in Matched ABTS and Conventional Seat Tests on the IIHS Rear Sled
【24h】

BioRID Dummy Responses in Matched ABTS and Conventional Seat Tests on the IIHS Rear Sled

机译:IIHS后排雪橇上匹配的ABTS和常规座椅测试中的BioRID虚拟响应

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective: This study analyzed matched rear sled tests with all belts to seat (ABTS) and conventional seats from the same vehicle model to determine differences in BioRID IIg dummy responses. Methods: The BioRID IIg rear impact dummy was placed on ABTS or conventional seats and subjected to 10 mph rear sled tests using the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) whiplash assessment protocol. Measurements in the dummy included head and pelvis triaxial accelerations, T1 and L1 biaxial accelerations, and upper and lower neck triaxial forces and moments. High-speed video captured the dummy and seat kinematics during seat loading and rebound into the lap-shoulder belts. Four vehicles were available with conventional and ABTS seats in the same model. They were the 2007-2008 Chrysler Sebring, 2006 Ford F-150, 2005-2007 Saab 9-3, and 2006-2007 BMW 3 series. Confidence intervals were used to determine significant differences between the matched ABTS and conventional seat responses. Results: Ten sled tests were available for the 4 vehicle models with ABTS and conventional seats. The upper neck rearward shear force was 75 percent higher (range 17%-156%, P < 0.05) in the matched ABTS compared to conventional seats. The upper neck tension was 44 percent higher (range 24%-94%, P < .05) and the lower neck extension moment was 102 percent higher (range 38%-187%, P < 0.05). The Saab 9-3 responses were lower than the 3 other vehicles for both the conventional and ABTS seats. There was less rearward shear and extension of the neck in the Saab seats. Conclusions: The tests show that ABTS seats involved significantly higher neck tensions, rearward shear forces, and extension moments than matched conventional seats. Overall, ABTS seats applied more load on the head and spine, had less control of neck kinematics, and had higher risks for whiplash and more severe injury than conventional seats in the same vehicle model.
机译:目的:本研究分析了同一车型的所有座椅安全带(ABTS)和传统座椅的匹配后排雪橇测试,以确定BioRID IIg虚拟反应的差异。方法:将BioRID IIg后防撞假人放在ABTS或常规座椅上,并使用公路安全保险协会(IIHS)鞭打评估方案进行10 mph的后雪橇测试。假人的测量包括头和骨盆三轴加速度,T1和L1双轴加速度以及上下颈部三轴力和力矩。高速视频捕获了座椅加载过程中的假人和座椅运动学信息,并反弹到大腿安全带中。共有四款车型具有相同型号的传统和ABTS座椅。它们是2007-2008年的克莱斯勒赛百灵,2006福特F-150、2005-2007萨博9-3和2006-2007宝马3系列。置信区间用于确定匹配的ABTS与常规座椅反应之间的显着差异。结果:四种带ABTS和传统座椅的车型可进行十次雪橇测试。与常规座椅相比,匹配的ABTS的上颈后向剪切力高75%(范围17%-156%,P <0.05)。上颈部张力高出44%(范围为24%-94%,P <.05),下颈部延伸力矩高出102%(范围为38%-187%,P <0.05)。萨博9-3的常规座位和ABTS座位的响应均低于其他3个车辆。萨博(Saab)座椅的后向剪切力和颈部伸展度较小。结论:测试表明,ABTS座椅比传统的座椅具有更高的颈部张力,向后剪切力和伸展力矩。总体而言,与同种车型的传统座椅相比,ABTS座椅在头部和脊柱上施加了更大的负担,对颈部运动的控制较少,并且发生鞭打的风险和更严重的伤害。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号